2023, Vol. 14, No. 1. - go to content...

Permanent address of this page - https://sfk-mn.ru/en/03klsk123.html

Метаданные этой статьи так же доступны на русском языке

Full article in PDF format (file size: 372.4 KB)

For citation:

Wang H. [The role of N.Y. Danilevsky and V. Solovyov’s polemics about China in modern disputes about the future of Russia] World of Science. Series: Sociology, Philology, Cultural Studies, 2023, Vol. 14, No. 1. Available at: https://sfk-mn.ru/PDF/03KLSK123.pdf (in Russian).

The role of N.Y. Danilevsky and V. Solovyov’s polemics about China in modern disputes about the future of Russia

Wang Haoying
Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China
The School of Foreign Languages and Literature
E-mail: wanghaoying@mail.bnu.edu.cn
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2746-4345

Abstract. The article attempts to comprehend the polemics of the 1880s–1890s of Russian philosophers N.Y. Danilevsky and V. Solovyov on the importance and role of China in the history of world culture from the perspective of today’s understanding of the further development of Russia. The author turns to historical philosophical material not only in order to draw further lessons from the experience of thinkers who lived at a similar time of «crossroads», the political and cultural crisis of the country, but also, building analogies, to explore possible options for the future of modern Russia. The philosophers’ reflections on China were, in fact, a manifestation of concern for the fate of their country and the search for prospects for their own people. To a certain extent, the subject of philosophical polemics of that time is similar to the oppositional views on present-day Russia and its future. Against the background of sinophobic ideas that became widespread in Europe in the XIX century (the theory of «yellow danger»), N.Y. Danilevsky in his theory of «cultural and historical types» sincerely recognized the historical contribution of Chinese culture to the development of world civilization. The ratio of Vl. Solovyov’s attitude to Chinese culture was far from ambiguous: China, and by analogy with it, and Russia seemed to him, like other representatives of Westernism, the apotheosis of backwardness, inertia and conservatism. Many famous thinkers of that and later time were involved in the dispute between the two philosophers — N.N. Stakhov, K.N. Bestuzhev-Ryumin, K.N. Leontiev, N.I. Kareev, N.K. Mikhailovsky, etc. However, even after more than a hundred years, the relevance of this issue remains the highest, forcing not only philosophers, political scientists, sociologists, but also creative people concerned about the fate of their country to respond today.

Keywords: N.Y. Danilevsky; V. Solovyov; China; the theory of «yellow danger»; the theory of «cultural and historical types»; Russia; the historical path of Russia; Eurasianism; Westernism

Download article in PDF format